The Supreme Court has set aside the Patna High Court’s condition that required an accused to wait for one year after charge framing before applying for bail again. The apex court held that such a restriction was unjustified and modified the High Court's order accordingly.
The case involved an accused who was denied bail by the Patna High Court. The High Court, while rejecting the bail application, had imposed a condition that the petitioner could renew their plea only after one year from the framing of charges. This decision was challenged in the Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of the petitioner.
Read Also:- We Must Reflect: Justice Abhay Oka on Judiciary's Challenges and the Common Man's Faith
A bench comprising Justices Pankaj Mithal and S.V.N. Bhatti emphasized that imposing a one-year moratorium was not legally justified. The court stated:
"The High Court by the impugned order dated 07.08.2024 has declined to enlarge the petitioner on bail but has granted him liberty to renew his prayer for bail after one year of the framing of the charge. The petitioner is aggrieved by the condition so imposed, fixing a moratorium for one year for moving a fresh bail after the framing of the charges. We are of the considered opinion that the High Court while granting liberty to renew the prayer for bail could not have imposed such a condition and ought to have permitted the filing of the fresh bail application after the charges are framed. In the case at hand, the charges have been framed and therefore, the petitioner is set at liberty to renew his prayer for the bail before the High Court notwithstanding the moratorium of one year imposed. The impugned order stands modified to the above extent. SLP disposed of."
Read Also:- Supreme Court Orders Strict Implementation of Drugs & Magic Remedies Act to Curb Misleading Medical Ads
With this ruling, the Supreme Court has effectively nullified paragraph 6 of the High Court’s order, which previously stated:
"In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the Petitioner. However, he is at liberty that he may renew his prayer for bail one year after framing of charge."
The accused in this case was charged with assaulting the complainant’s father and attacking him with a sword. With the Supreme Court’s decision
the petitioner now has the right to seek bail immediately after the framing of charges, without waiting for a year.
Case Details: MD GULZAR Vs STATE OF BIHAR|SLP(Crl) No. 805/2025
SLP has been filed through Advocate Ashish Choudhury.
